Google Nexus 4 Unofficially LTE'd, Officially In Stock at $299/349

Given the Nexus4 is considerably cheaper, it's unsurprising there's a massive demand for it.

It's difficult to judge but I do not recall a similar level of interest on forums for the Nexus S or Galaxy Nexus. People are even willing to pay the very inflated price O2 are charging for a Nexus 4. Personally I took it for granted that if I want one, I will have to wait about for things to calm down.

Given the Nexus4 is considerably cheaper, it's unsurprising there's a massive demand for it.

It's difficult to judge but I do not recall a similar level of interest on forums for the Nexus S or Galaxy Nexus. People are even willing to pay the very inflated price O2 are charging for a Nexus 4. Personally I took it for granted that if I want one, I will have to wait about for things to calm down.

They weren't really sold at the Nexus 4's prices. OK, the Galaxy Nexus was, but it was already a year old at that point and there were much better phones available.

I think Apple does have production problem given all the problems they have with iPhone 5. That's said, why do people pay $700 on a "premium" phone that have poor QC? I would be piss if I spent 700 and get a scratched yellow tinted screen.

However, Apple at least let you order the phone and tell you the approximate wait time, which is much better than a stupid out of stock message.

I think Apple does have production problem given all the problems they have with iPhone 5. That's said, why do people pay $700 on a "premium" phone that have poor QC? I would be piss if I spent 700 and get a scratched yellow tinted screen.

However, Apple at least let you order the phone and tell you the approximate wait time, which is much better than a stupid out of stock message.

Because it's not normal to get a scratched yellow tinted screen; that's an outlier.

There are 7 iPhone 5 and 6 iPhone 4S at work and only one got a scratch out of the box (and promptly exchanged).

Apple are no less guilty of exactly the same tactics though. Generate an enormous buzz, get people physically queuing outside of places, then completely sell out within a few days. Apparently the iPhone5 had a production run of 2 million which sold out by pre-order.

Given the Nexus4 is considerably cheaper, it's unsurprising there's a massive demand for it.

Guilty? 2 million is not small potatoes. Put another way, Apple sold out in an hour what takes HTC, or Sony, or LG, or Motorola, or RIM, or Nokia, or ZTE a month to sell.

Let me repeat, Apple sells as many iPhones in a couple hours what the next 7 smartphone manufacturers sell in a month. Only Samsung sells more smartphones.

Yep, guilty. Apple are notorious practitioners of false-exclusivity; they aren't the only ones, but that makes it no less obvious. Really gets those reporters on the street, interviewing dumbasses who queue outside Apple retailers.

People need to get over themselves. Phones are pieces of consumer electronics. After the initial rush, they'll be manufactured continuously for at least the next year. There's no question anyone who wants one and can afford it will be able to buy one - it's just a question of when.

Yep, guilty. Apple are notorious practitioners of false-exclusivity; they aren't the only ones, but that makes it no less obvious. Really gets those reporters on the street, interviewing dumbasses who queue outside Apple retailers.

People need to get over themselves. Phones are pieces of consumer electronics. After the initial rush, they'll be manufactured continuously for at least the next year. There's no question anyone who wants one and can afford it will be able to buy one - it's just a question of when.

How is that Apple's fault?

By your own reasoning, Apple shouldn't be stockpiling a month of phones (read 6m) for a single weekend, because phones are pieces of consumer electronics. After the initial rush, they'll be manufactured continuously for at least the next year.

By that logic then, Apple will always sell out in the first hour. 2 million would normally translate to an entire week of iPhone sales.

You're being hypocritical in assigning blame to Apple and then saying people should just expect to buy later because the phone will always be there three months later. Maybe it's still news to you but one month later and wait times for the iPhone 5 are still 2 to 3 weeks.

I'm not saying you guys should stop with the apple vs google stuff. I'm just saying that I'm not really interested in hearing it.

In aid of turning this back to nexus 4 talk: I ended up getting a 16G version at 1:30pm EST yesterday, so it didn't "sell out in minutes" or whatever people are claiming. Google released a phone into inventory every thirty seconds or so, and there was some rationing involved to ensure that people could buy phones for a few hours at least.

To be sure, people wanted the Nexus 4 because of its price point for an unlocked phone with solid features. Still, I think that if the rush tells us anything about the market, it tells us that more people than anybody estimated are dissatisfied with the carriers' bloatware and slow updates. People feel that Google doesn't futz with the carriers' product, and the carriers shouldn't futz with Google's.

I'm not saying you guys should stop with the apple vs google stuff. I'm just saying that I'm not really interested in hearing it.

I'm excited for more AvG stuff. I want to see the N4 sell 10m this quarter and move 25m next quarter.

Quote:

In aid of turning this back to nexus 4 talk: I ended up getting a 16G version at 1:30pm EST yesterday, so it didn't "sell out in minutes" or whatever people are claiming. Google released a phone into inventory every thirty seconds or so, and there was some rationing involved to ensure that people could buy phones for a few hours at least.

To be sure, people wanted the Nexus 4 because of its price point for an unlocked phone with solid features. Still, I think that if the rush tells us anything about the market, it tells us that more people than anybody estimated are dissatisfied with the carriers' bloatware and slow updates. People feel that Google doesn't futz with the carriers' product, and the carriers shouldn't futz with Google's.

I think you are examining too deeply into the reasoning. Certainly for some customers you are correct about the motivations, and no one is happy with lack of service and updates and capability.

I think the rush tells us that Google underpriced their product. They probably could have sold it for $399 and $449 and still have seen the same rush; this is, after all, a very good smartphone.

My problem isn't with Apple, it's more with the people who fall for it; they're apparently OK with being cynically and deliberately manipulated for someone else's profit. This week, the new hip thing to bitch about is not being able to buy a Nexus 4.

Pffffffft.

OrangeCream wrote:

Maybe it's still news to you but one month later and wait times for the iPhone 5 are still 2 to 3 weeks.

And why should I care ? Will my life end until I can buy an iPhone5/Nexus 4 ?

My problem isn't with Apple, it's more with the people who fall for it; they're apparently OK with being cynically and deliberately manipulated for someone else's profit. This week, the new hip thing to bitch about is not being able to buy a Nexus 4.

Pffffffft.

OrangeCream wrote:

Maybe it's still news to you but one month later and wait times for the iPhone 5 are still 2 to 3 weeks.

And why should I care ? Will my life end until I can buy an iPhone5/Nexus 4 ?

Nope.

It's not about you caring about wait times, it's about you being logically consistent.

You hold a mistaken belief that Apple practices false exclusivity when there is in fact a real scarcity. I provided two pieces of information to support my point that your belief is mistaken:1) Apple sells as many iPhones in a couple hours as the rest of the industry does in a month2) Almost two months later Apple is still predicting a 2-3 week wait time for their product

Now this isn't an Apple thread, but you did bring up Apple by comparing them to Google's sellout of the N4, and I'm also going to say I think you are also wrong there about Google generating a false-scarcity. Google cannot manufacture enough of them at the price of $249. From any perspective you wish to take, Google could trivially sell about 100m of the N4 annually if they chose to:1) Manufacture enough2) Distribute gobally3) Distribute broadly via multiple retail channels

Google may not ever decide to manufacture enough (and then there will be scarcity), they may never distribute globally (and again, resellers will guarantee there will be local scarcity), and they may never distribute broadly via multiple channels (again contributing to local scarcity as local retailers run out of stock and phones get resold via channels such as eBay, Craigslist, etc).

It's not about you caring about wait times, it's about you being logically consistent.

You hold a mistaken belief that Apple practices false exclusivity when there is in fact a real scarcity. I provided two pieces of information to support my point that your belief is mistaken:1) Apple sells as many iPhones in a couple hours as the rest of the industry does in a month2) Almost two months later Apple is still predicting a 2-3 week wait time for their product

Hmm. Wouldn't you equally say that Apple would be the best-placed company to adequately judge demand, then ? Why are they getting pre-order stock numbers on the low side of wrong every single time they release a new device ?

Quote:

Now this isn't an Apple thread, but you did bring up Apple by comparing them to Google's sellout of the N4, and I'm also going to say I think you are also wrong there about Google generating a false-scarcity.

I never said Google did so. In fact, I could genuinely believe they didn't expect the Nexus 4 to be as successful as it is so far. Their other Nexus phones weren't massively popular (the Galaxy Nexus variants positively flopped in comparison to the Galaxy S variants), and the Nexus 4 is comparably-specced, if not outclassed quite heavily, by phones nearly 6 months old now. If you wanted a phone with a spec similar to the Nexus 4, there's at least 2, maybe 3, you could've been using since June. Ergo, it's extremely possible they were caught by surprise by demand.

That won't happen until the Nexus lineup can sell tens of millions of phones a quarter.

I don't think that's true. If it's doing well on the margins, on poaching people from the subsidized/contract funnel carriers and OEMs are used to, then it can be very influential without having to sell those kinds of numbers.

That won't happen until the Nexus lineup can sell tens of millions of phones a quarter.

I don't think that's true. If it's doing well on the margins, on poaching people from the subsidized/contract funnel carriers and OEMs are used to, then it can be very influential without having to sell those kinds of numbers.

Elaborate please. Say Google sells 1m N4 a month, 12m a year.

That means, approximately, they will poach 4m from Samsung who would otherwise buy one of their 120m handsets annually, 3m from one of Apple's 100m handsets, and the remaining 5m from the combined HTC/Nokia/Sony/LG/RIM's 140m handsets annually.

How is losing 5m going to influence Apple? How is losing 4m going to influence Samsung?

Say Google sells, as I propose, 20m N4 a month (10s of millions = at least 2), for 240m a year.

Now using the same 'ratio', Samsung loses 80m of their 120m customers. Apple loses 60m of their 100m customers. HTC, Sony, and RIM go broke because Google just poached all the customers (sucking out 100m of their otherwise expected net of 140m).

Now Apple and Samsung are forced to react or risk losing a substantial number of their sales.

This is of course a sliding scale; any value between 1m to 20m will therefore have varying impact on Samsung and Apple; 2m leaves them unlikely to do much, 9m still has a significant impact on their sales.

It's not about you caring about wait times, it's about you being logically consistent.

You hold a mistaken belief that Apple practices false exclusivity when there is in fact a real scarcity. I provided two pieces of information to support my point that your belief is mistaken:1) Apple sells as many iPhones in a couple hours as the rest of the industry does in a month2) Almost two months later Apple is still predicting a 2-3 week wait time for their product

Hmm. Wouldn't you equally say that Apple would be the best-placed company to adequately judge demand, then ? Why are they getting pre-order stock numbers on the low side of wrong every single time they release a new device ?

Could it be that they keep getting their pre-order stock wrong because demand keeps growing faster than anyone could imagine?

You keep ignoring the point I keep highlighting: The average smartphone vendor sells about 7m-8m smartphones in 13 weeks, on average.

Apple now routinely sells that many on a 4 day launch weekend; outside of launch they sell about 2m in a week. Let us just assume that a launch window of 2 weeks then would be fully met if they had 10m the first week and 5m the second week. That would mean they would be stockpiling iPhones for seven weeks before they can launch.

Apple's supply chain is designed around only maintaining 5 days of inventory; as it is the fact that they can field a good 5m in a single weekend and an additional 5m the following week (or 4 weeks of average inventory) means they are already stockpiling a good 2 to 3 weeks of iPhones before release.

Quote:

Quote:

Now this isn't an Apple thread, but you did bring up Apple by comparing them to Google's sellout of the N4, and I'm also going to say I think you are also wrong there about Google generating a false-scarcity.

I never said Google did so.

You said Apple was guilty of the same thing as Google.

Quote:

In fact, I could genuinely believe they didn't expect the Nexus 4 to be as successful as it is so far.

And I assert that the same logic is true for Apple. Just because Apple routinely ships over 26m iPhones a quarter doesn't mean they expect to be able to ship 60m, for example.

Quote:

Their other Nexus phones weren't massively popular (the Galaxy Nexus variants positively flopped in comparison to the Galaxy S variants), and the Nexus 4 is comparably-specced, if not outclassed quite heavily, by phones nearly 6 months old now. If you wanted a phone with a spec similar to the Nexus 4, there's at least 2, maybe 3, you could've been using since June. Ergo, it's extremely possible they were caught by surprise by demand.

There's approximately three phones in the N4's class:iPhone 5HTC One X+Galaxy S3

Of those 3, the 5 should sell at about 25m to 40m a quarter, the S3 should sell at about 15m to 30m a quarter, and the One X+ is an inexplicable flop.

Given that we already know how successful similar phones are, you could argue Google is incompetent for not manufacturing 10s of millions of N4... but you in the same breath don't understand why Apple cannot adequately judge demand.

It's the same problem. History says you should expect to sell X phones, but reality shows that you will sell almost 2X. This is not something you are prepared to deal with, ergo you have shortages. You cannot argue that Apple is incompetent for being unable to handle prodigiously large pre-orders and opening sales without also arguing Google is too, or you have to accept that both companies are equally capable but demand was much higher than either expected.

Could it be that they keep getting their pre-order stock wrong because demand keeps growing faster than anyone could imagine?

I really don't think so, no. Apple are very well well aware they can sell as many iPhones as they are physically capable of manufacturing. Yet in 6 iPhone launches, there's a shortage inside one or two days, every time. It's artificial, and deliberate, every time.

Quote:

You said Apple was guilty of the same thing as Google.

Nope; trikster2 accused Google of doing so. I pointed out that Apple is well known to do it too.

Quote:

And I assert that the same logic is true for Apple.

Except they can't get it right after 5 practise attempts beforehand. Or they just don't want to.

Quote:

Given that we already know how successful similar phones are, you could argue Google is incompetent for not manufacturing 10s of millions of N4...

You could argue, yes, but not plausibly. No other Nexus device has sold as successful so far as the Nexus 4 has been this week; the Nexus 7 is doing well, but it's not a phone and thus not a competitor and won't have sales to mimic a competitor. Neither is the iPhone5, IMHO - if you've got an iPhone, you'll probably buy another, but you probably wouldn't consider an Android instead - and vice versa. So why would Google suddenly expect to sell more devices on day 1 than ever before ? I think the answer is exactly that they didn't think they would.

And the Nexus 4 has some interesting quirks that don't exactly make it comparable to the GS3 (no expandable storage, no LTE in the MK1s). Earlier in the thread, I noted that the Nexus 4's specs aren't exactly mind-blowing compared to the GS3. It's the price that's alluring, and that's basically the surprise success story here.

It's frustrating that I couldn't pre-order a device. It's even more frustrating that I can't just order one now and get it when there are more in stock. And it's even more frustrating that there's not even an option to notify me when there are more in stock.

Could it be that they keep getting their pre-order stock wrong because demand keeps growing faster than anyone could imagine?

I really don't think so, no. Apple are very well well aware they can sell as many iPhones as they are physically capable of manufacturing. Yet in 6 iPhone launches, there's a shortage inside one or two days, every time. It's artificial, and deliberate, every time.

How many is that? Let me use your own logic against you:No other iPhone has sold as successful as the iPhone 5 has been opening weekend; no competitor has ever sold as many phones in a weekend, so cannot use other sales data to mimic. So why would Apple suddenly expect to sell more devices on day 1 than the first week of iPhone 4S sales?

Quote:

Quote:

You said Apple was guilty of the same thing as Google.

Nope; trikster2 accused Google of doing so. I pointed out that Apple is well known to do it too.

And I'm pointing out that you're both wrong.

Quote:

Quote:

And I assert that the same logic is true for Apple.

Except they can't get it right after 5 practise attempts beforehand. Or they just don't want to.

Every time they make more, every time they sell out. It's not as if they aren't trying, or trying hard enough. I asked you a question: How many weeks should they stockpile for the iPhone 5S, assuming the iPhone 5 sales follow the same pattern as the iPhone 4S: 40m this quarter, 45m next quarter, 30m the quarter after, and 25m the quarter the iPhone 5S is launched.

Do you think they should have, say 3 weeks? How about 4 weeks? Stockpiling for a month sounds reasonable, yes?

So that means they will have 12m iPhones available opening weekend. That would mean they sell 6m pre-orders and have 6m available for walk in customers.

And then they will still hit shortages because then they will be selling at 5m a week and are only manufacturing for 3m a week.

So maybe they need to up their weekly capacity; you tell me, how does Apple know how many iPhone 5S will sell in a week a year from now? How do you know?

Quote:

Quote:

Given that we already know how successful similar phones are, you could argue Google is incompetent for not manufacturing 10s of millions of N4...

You could argue, yes, but not plausibly. No other Nexus device has sold as successful so far as the Nexus 4 has been this week; the Nexus 7 is doing well, but it's not a phone and thus not a competitor and won't have sales to mimic a competitor. Neither is the iPhone5, IMHO - if you've got an iPhone, you'll probably buy another, but you probably wouldn't consider an Android instead - and vice versa. So why would Google suddenly expect to sell more devices on day 1 than ever before ? I think the answer is exactly that they didn't think they would.

That exact logic and reasoning equally applies to Apple. They have never sold anything as popular as the current iPhone, ever, for the last 5 years now.

Quote:

And the Nexus 4 has some interesting quirks that don't exactly make it comparable to the GS3 (no expandable storage, no LTE in the MK1s). Earlier in the thread, I noted that the Nexus 4's specs aren't exactly mind-blowing compared to the GS3. It's the price that's alluring, and that's basically the surprise success story here.

It's frustrating that I couldn't pre-order a device. It's even more frustrating that I can't just order one now and get it when there are more in stock. And it's even more frustrating that there's not even an option to notify me when there are more in stock.

It's frustrating that I couldn't pre-order a device. It's even more frustrating that I can't just order one now and get it when there are more in stock. And it's even more frustrating that there's not even an option to notify me when there are more in stock.

Ah shit, we got some Battlefront leakage, it'll take days to get the stink out.

---

Reading the reviews, I must say that it seems Google nails every single thing with the Nexus 4. Except the camera. Which is a sticking point for me. I've got a three-year-old and carrying a decent camera around all the time is great now that they've improved so much. But this camera once again seems to fall short of Samsung and the iPhone, not to mention the new Lumia (which absolutely nails the camera but seems to fail at other points).

That said, it's still Nexus 4 or a Lumia 920 for me and I eagerly await comments from my fellow Arsians.

Oh, and one more thing: Fuck you Google and LG for charging nearly $600 for the Nexus 4 over here. That's a pretty big deal breaker unless the rest of the phone is amazing.

GoogleEbay has an anti-arbitrage policy that prohibits sellers from advertising something they don't already have possession of. You'd think they could enforce it for high-profile products like this one.

That won't happen until the Nexus lineup can sell tens of millions of phones a quarter.

I don't think that's true. If it's doing well on the margins, on poaching people from the subsidized/contract funnel carriers and OEMs are used to, then it can be very influential without having to sell those kinds of numbers.

Elaborate please. Say Google sells 1m N4 a month, 12m a year.

That means, approximately, they will poach 4m from Samsung who would otherwise buy one of their 120m handsets annually, 3m from one of Apple's 100m handsets, and the remaining 5m from the combined HTC/Nokia/Sony/LG/RIM's 140m handsets annually.

How is losing 5m going to influence Apple? How is losing 4m going to influence Samsung?

Say Google sells, as I propose, 20m N4 a month (10s of millions = at least 2), for 240m a year.

Now using the same 'ratio', Samsung loses 80m of their 120m customers. Apple loses 60m of their 100m customers. HTC, Sony, and RIM go broke because Google just poached all the customers (sucking out 100m of their otherwise expected net of 140m).

Now Apple and Samsung are forced to react or risk losing a substantial number of their sales.

This is of course a sliding scale; any value between 1m to 20m will therefore have varying impact on Samsung and Apple; 2m leaves them unlikely to do much, 9m still has a significant impact on their sales.

What I'm saying is that this is an extremely one dimensional and obtuse model for assessing the impact and it ignores obvious repercussions for no good reason that I can see. You're essentially refusing to consider any impact not from the direct sales of that one model when the Nexus is a lever that Google tries to use to influence the entire ecosystem. The Nexus line's raison d'etre isn't even a consideration as far as you're concerned, and I think that's broken.

Let's rewind this a bit. Say Nexus 4 sells however many it sells, which is I suspect nowhere near your >200m a year mark, which I suspect is chosen for the specific purpose of being a benchmark it won't meet. The key step you don't appear to be interested in is where other Android OEMs adjust prices accordingly and the cumulative sales of that tier of phones is significant. Treating this as though Samsung has to lose a hundred million sales and only then do they react is insane. They'll react long before that happens and by doing so, multiply the impact of the Nexus 4 far beyond its direct sales numbers.

As a knock-on effect, high end smartphones are steered down in price, accelerating the move away from subsidized contract pricing in the US (already noted by industry analysts) and rewarding carriers that have pricing models that support this.

That's where I think this is headed. This whole ">200m sales? (y/n)" question seems intentionally designed to not have to think about this.

The contract/subsidy model appears close to dead ending. Google benefits by accelerating its downfall, they benefit by encouraging OEMs and carriers to adopt the prepaid model, and they even benefit if Apple does it too. It's win/win/win/win as far as Google is concerned, and they don't need to sell 200m for that to be true.

I don't even think it's bad for Apple, because I think they'll adjust just fine. And I don't think it being good for Apple is bad for Google either. If this strategy is workable in the first place it's only because the subsidized/contract model is fundamentally vulnerable as prices for smartphones come down. Google is getting ahead of the game by, at most, months, maybe quarters.

I absolutely believe smartphone prices will fall. The only question is who does it.

My best guess is split between Google, Sony, Amazon, or Nintendo, all of whom can afford to sell barely above cost to sell content. Of those 4 I think Sony is least capable, then Google, with Nintendo at the top of the heap based upon their existing handheld game console business model.

I absolutely believe smartphone prices will fall. The only question is who does it.

My best guess is split between Google, Sony, Amazon, or Nintendo, all of whom can afford to sell barely above cost to sell content. Of those 4 I think Sony is least capable, then Google, with Nintendo at the top of the heap based upon their existing handheld game console business model.

Just replying to note that you appear to dispute my rebuttal of your post not at all.

I absolutely believe smartphone prices will fall. The only question is who does it.

My best guess is split between Google, Sony, Amazon, or Nintendo, all of whom can afford to sell barely above cost to sell content. Of those 4 I think Sony is least capable, then Google, with Nintendo at the top of the heap based upon their existing handheld game console business model.

Just replying to note that you appear to dispute my rebuttal of your post not at all.

Basically his MO is to float points he isn't sure will work (or which he claims to believe, which would mean his threshold of belief is very low since he hasn't critically examined the point for himself yet).

It's annoying and if he's going to do it, I want them to be some friction to the process rather than allowing him to seamlessly move on to something else.

I absolutely believe smartphone prices will fall. The only question is who does it.

My best guess is split between Google, Sony, Amazon, or Nintendo, all of whom can afford to sell barely above cost to sell content. Of those 4 I think Sony is least capable, then Google, with Nintendo at the top of the heap based upon their existing handheld game console business model.

Just replying to note that you appear to dispute my rebuttal of your post not at all.

I don't think your logic works. If Google doesn't ramp up beyond 12m a year as in my example, no competing OEM gets hurt. The success of the N4 may signal to competitors that marketshare can be had by lowering prices, by everyone already knows that. They already have $200 Symbian, RIM, and Android phones, crappy they may be.

Samsung and Apple will not be tempted to change the status quo, leaving only HTC and LG to try and reproduce the success of the N4 at say $400. Nokia is already trying and failing.

However, the process where by the N4 causes prices to fall is slow and long term as every year and generation the oems drop the high end phone price in order to take market share away from Samsung and Apple.

On the other hand, if Google ramps from 1m a month to 1m a week, I fail to see how they couldn't sell out at $299. A year from now they introduce the N4 successor and ramp to 2m a week and still sell out at $299 a phone.

Basically his MO is to float points he isn't sure will work (or which he claims to believe, which would mean his threshold of belief is very low since he hasn't critically examined the point for himself yet).

It's annoying and if he's going to do it, I want them to be some friction to the process rather than allowing him to seamlessly move on to something else.

I do believe it and I think Google is weak and indecisive if they don't bother to ramp to 1m phones a week.

I don't think your logic works. If Google doesn't ramp up beyond 12m a year as in my example, no competing OEM gets hurt.

Why should the goal be to hurt them?

OrangeCream wrote:

Samsung and Apple will not be tempted to change the status quo, leaving only HTC and LG to try and reproduce the success of the N4 at say $400.

I think Samsung will be able to keep prices high for truly exceptional phones like the Note line, and they'll probably be able to keep more of a premium on next gen A15-based phones when they come out, but I think we'll see something comparable to a Nexus 4 in the <$400 range in H1 2013 as a result of this.

That's how a $300 device can exert influence out of proportion to its direct sales, and why I think a model where only direct sales that "hurt" competitors is fundamentally broken.

I don't think Google wants to hurt Samsung, I think they want to make it in Samsung's interests to do something similar.

OrangeCream wrote:

I do believe it and I think Google is weak and indecisive if they don't bother to ramp to 1m phones a week.

Honestly, the reception of previous Nexus 4 phones has been pretty lukewarm and it seems entirely possible that they weren't prepared for finally hitting a formula that works at that kind of scale. That does seem like an unforced error on their part, and they're now having to go back and beef up the manufacturing to support it.

That's really the only problem I see here though. It also suggests Nexus 4 would have had the influence they wanted at a much lower level of sales.